GST demand Recovery without giving any opportunity to petitioner to file statutory appeal which is mandatory before initiating any recovery proceeding is clear violation of Section 78 of GST Act.
Kishore Kumar Arora Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court) Based on the material placed on record, it would have to be concluded that the taxable turnover of the petitioner was Rs. 15,28,468/-, which, as noticed above, is below the threshold limit of Rs. 20,00,000/- fixed for tobacco products. We are, therefore, inclined to agree […]
Renu Devi Banka Vs Union of India (Calcutta High Court) By this writ petition, petitioners have challenged the impugned show-cause-notice dated 3rd February, 2022 issued by the Special Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Adjudicating Authority, Chandigarh, against the 24 persons who are third parties/ noticees and none of them are the petitioners in this Writ Petition […]
There may be chances of diversion that might have taken place due to human error and it cannot be definitely concluded that diversion was deliberate
Orissa Stevedores Ltd. Vs Union of India (Orissa High Court) In view of submission made by the learned Senior Counsel that since all the bank accounts have been seized and the Petitioner is unable to operate, it is not possible to deposit the entire admitted interest at one go. Therefore, he prayed for lifting forthwith […]
Gourav Bansal Vs State of Haryana (Punjab & Haryana High Court) This common order shall dispose of above noted two petitions as they arise out of the same FIR. Prayer in these petitions, filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is for grant of regular bail to petitioners Gourav Bansal and Surender […]
Held that just because the parties have chosen a foreign-seated institutional arbitration under the UNCITRAL Law, it cannot be presumed that an agreement is excluded from the applicability of Section 9
Held that an independent director, not in charge or not responsible for day to day conduct of the business, is not liable for offence by invoking section 141 of Negotiable Instrument Act.
ITO admits that principle of judicial discipline mandates that the lower authorities are bound to follow the orders passed by the higher authorities. He expresses his unconditional apology and regret for the aforesaid observations/findings and prays that the said observations in the impugned order be expunged/deleted.
Patel Brothers & Co Vs State of Odisha (Orissa High Court) Admittedly, the Petitioner Assessee is a manufacturer of Bidis. The short question is whether it is included within the entry Tobacco and Tobacco products in item 16 of the Schedule under the Orissa Entry Tax Act (OET Act). Learned counsel for the Petitioner seeks […]
